§ 1066. Questions for the jury. The existence of the essentials of actionable negligence is, as a rule, a question for the jury; this principle has been repeatedly stated and many of the cases cited under different questions discussed will be found upon examination to also sustain it. Negligence,519 contributory negligence,520 proximate cause,521 sufficiency 55 N. W. 301; Lynn v. Ralpho Tp., 186 Pa. 420, 40 Atl. 568; Ammerman v. Coal Tp., 187 Pa. 326, 40 Atl. 1005. Burden of showing negligence on plaintiff. Einseidler v. Whitman County, 22 Wash. 388, 60 Pac. 1122. Verdict for defendant justified; see following cases: City of Elwood v. Carpenter, 12 Ind. App. 459, 40 N. E. 548; City of Bluffton v. McAfee, 12 Ind. App. 490, 40 N. E. 549; Parmenter v. City of Marion, 113 Iowa, 297, 85 N. W. 90; Butterfield v. City of Boston, 148 Mass. 544, 20 N. E. 113, 2 L. R. A. 447; Jackson v. City of Lansing, 121 Mich. 279, 80 N. W. 8; Tompsett v. Glade Tp., 198 Pa. 376, 48 Atl. 255; Stringert v. Ross Tp., 179 Pa. 614, 36 Atl. 345; Koepke v. City of Milwaukee, 112 Wis. 475, 88 N. W. 238. 519 City of Denver v. Hyatt, 28 Colo. 129, 63 Pac. 403; Baxter v. City of Cedar Rapids, 103 Iowa, 599, 72 N. W. 790; City of Rosedale v. Cosgrove, 10 Kan. App. 211, 63 Pac. 287; Fugate v. City of Somerset, 97 Ky. 48, 29 S. W. 970; Keen v. City of Havre de Grace, 93 Md. 34, 48 Atl. 444; O'Brien v. City of Worcester, 172 Mass. 348, 52 N. E. 385; Butts v. City of Eaton Rapids, 116 Mich. 539, 74 N. W. 872; McDonald v. City of St. Paul, 82 Minn. 308, 84 N. W. 1022; Fuchs v. City of St. Louis, 133 Mo. 168, 31 S. W. 115, 34 S. W. 508, 34 L. R. A. 118; Cleveland v. City of Bangor, 87 Me. 259, 32 Atl. 892; Leggett v. City of Watertown, 55 App. Div. 321, 66 N. Y. Supp. 910; Bishop v. Village of Goshen, 120 N. Y. 337, 24 N. E. 720; Fisher v. Village of Cambridge, 133 N. Y. 527, 30 N. E. 663; Schafer v. City of New York, 154 N. Y. 466, 48 N. E. 749; Bauerle v. City of Philadelphia, 184 Pa. 545, 39 Atl. 298; Corbin v. City of Philadelphia, 195 Pa. 461, 45 Atl. 1070, 49 L. R. A. 715; Kane v. City of Philadelphia, 196 Pa. 502, 46 Atl. 893; Brown v. Town of Mt. Holly, 69 Vt. 364, 38 Atl. 69; City of Lynchburg v. Wallace, 95 Va. 640, 29 S. E. 675; Laird v. Town of Otsego, 90 Wis. 25, 62 N. W. 1042; Schillinger v. Town of Verona, 88 Wis. 317, 69 N. W. 272; La Faye v. City of Superior, 104 Wis. 454, 80 N. W. 742. See, also, § 1057, ante. 520 City of Lincoln v. Power, 151 U. S. 436; Scott v. City of New Orleans (C. C. A.) 75 Fed. 373; Lutton v. Town of Vernon, 62 Conn. 1, 23 Atl. 1020, 27 Atl. 589; Shiflett v. City of Cedartown, 111 Ga. 834, 36 S. E. 221; City of Flora v. Pruett, 81 Ill. App. 161; Town of Fordsville v. Spencer, 23 Ky. L. R. 1260, 65 S. W. 132; Prince George's County Com'rs v. Burgess, 61 Md. 29; Bourget v. City of Cambridge, 156 Mass. 391, 31 N. E. 390, 16 L. R. A. 605; Lamb v. City of Worcester, 177 Mass. 82, 58 N. E. 474; Calkins v. City of Springfield, 167 of the evidence,522 the service of notice of the accident as required by law, or notice of the defect, the manner and the time of such service, and notice of the defect,523 are all for consideration and determination by the jury. Negligence in all its essentials and details involves questions of fact and seldom those of law. It might be said, however, that where the evidence upon a material question is such that men of ordinary intelligence can reach but one conclusion, it then becomes one for the court and not for a jury.524 Mass. 68, 44 N. E. 1055; Corcoran v. City of Detroit, 95 Mich. 84, 54 N. W. 692; Perkins v. Delaware Tp., 113 Mich. 377, 71 N. W. 643; Dundas v. City of Lansing, 75 Mich. 499, 42 N. W. 1011, 5 L. R. A. 143; Urtel v. City of Flint, 122 Mich. 65, 80 N. W. 991; Kopelka v. Bay City, 125 Mich. 625, 84 N. W. 1106; Heib v. Town of Big Flats, 66 App. Div. 88, 73 N. Y. Supp. 86; City of Guthrie v. Swan, 3 Okl. 116, Id., 5 Okl. 779, 41 Pac. 84, 51 Pac. 562; Oklahoma City v. Welsh, 3 Okl. 288, 41 Pac. 598; Hamerlynck v. Banfield, 36 Or. 436, 59 Pac. 712; Gardner v. Wasco County, 37 Or. 392, 61 Pac. 834, 62 Pac. 753; Bitting v. Maxatawny Tp., 180 Pa. 357, 36 Atl. 855; O'Malley v. Borough of Parsons, 191 Pa. 612, 43 Atl. 384; Allen v. Borough of Du Bois, 181 Pa. 184, 37 Atl. 195; Hampson v. Taylor, 15 R. I. 83, 8 Atl. 331, 23 Atl. 732; Overpeck v. Rapid City, 14 S. D. 507, 85 N. W. 990; City of Galveston v. Hemmis, 72 Tex. 558, 11 S. W. 29; Jordan v. City of Seattle, 26 Wash. 61, 66 Pac. 114; Mc Leod v. City of Spokane, 26 Wash. 346, 67 Pac. 74; Arthur v. City of Charleston, 46 W. Va. 88, 32 S. E. 1024; McKeigue v. City of Janesville, 68 Wis. 50, 31 N. W. 298; Slivitski v. Town of Wein, 93 Wis. 460, 67 N. W. 730. But see Snoddy v. City of Huntington, 37 W. Va. 111, 16 S. E. 442. See § 1058, ante. 521 City of Rock Falls v. Wells, 169 Ill. 224, 48 N. E. 440; Daniels v. Lebanon, 58 N. H. 284. Question for the jury. Gardner v. Wasco County, 37 Or. 392, 61 Pac. 834; rehearing denied, 62 Pac. 753; Blakely v. Laurens County, 55 S. C. 422, 33 S. E. 503; Gonzales v. City of Galveston, 84 Tex. 3, 19 S. W. 284. See §§ 952, 993 and 1059, ante. 522 See § 1065, ante. 523 Hodges v. City of Waterloo, 109 Iowa, 444, 80 N. W. 523; McKissick v. City of St. Louis, 154 Mo. 588, 55 S. W. 859. See, also, §§ 1037 et seq., and 1061 et seq., ante. 524 Southworth v. Shea, 131 Ala. 419, 30 So. 774. See § 1057. I. EDUCATIONAL. CHAPTER XI. SOME PUBLIC DUTIES. II. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIVE. (For complete Analysis of this Subdivision see p. 2443.) I. EDUCATIONAL. § 1067. Public school systems. 1068. 1069. Maintenance of public schools. School funds; special; how raised. 1070. General and special school funds; how apportioned. 1072. Manner of disbursement. 1073. School districts; organization. 1074. Alteration of school districts. 1075. School system; how governed. 1076. State superintendent of public instruction. 1077. 1078. County superintendents; term of office. Powers. 1079. School district meetings. 1080. Powers of school directors and officers of other than of com. In modern days it is not only considered a governmental function but also, and especially in the United States, an imperative governmental duty to provide for and maintain a system of public education. This is true not only because through education is the individual rendered better capable of rational and good government, but also because education adds to his economic efficiency. Governments recognize the fact that as a purely business proposition, public education pays. The Federal government and the various states are thoroughly committed to this idea and have, by constitutional provisions and legislative enactments, established and provided for the maintenance of public free schools and colleges.1 Public sentiment in this respect is well expressed in the article to be found in the Minnesota Constitution.2 "The stability of a republican form of government depending mainly upon the intelligence of the people, it shall be the duty of the legislature to establish a general and uniform system of public schools." The plan or scheme of organization as generally adopted provides for district schools, as they are commonly called and various institutions of higher education comprising high, graded and normal schools and state universities, including colleges of agriculture, mechanic arts, law, medicine, dentistry and science, literature and the arts. All these possess one characteristic, namely, that they are free and public. This principle is limited only by the powerof the proper public authorities as given by law to make such rules and regulations as shall be compatible with their efficient control and discipline. It is also common to charge for the facilities afforded for a professional education. Another characteristic 1 Davies v. Holland, 43 Ark. 425; In re Kindergarten Schools, 18 Colo. 234, 32 Pac. 422, 19 L. R. A. 469; State v. Hine, 59 Conn. 50, 21 Atl. 1024, 10 L. R. A. 83; Brenan v. People, 176 Ill. 620, 52 N. E. 353; Quick v. Springfield Tp., 7 Ind. 636; State v. Bailey, 157 Ind. 324, 61 N. E. 730, 59 L. R. A. 435; Marshall v. Donovan, 73 Ky. (10 Bush) 682; Board of Education of Hawesville v. Louisville, H. & St. L. R. Co., 23 Ky. L. R. 376, 62 S. W. 1125; Third Ward School Dist. v. School Directors, 23 La. Ann. 152; Thomas v. Visitors of Frederick County School, 7 Gill & J. (Md.) 369; Stuart v. School Dist. No. 1, 30 Mich. 69; Chrisman v. City of Brookhaven, 70 Miss. 477, 12 So. 458; State v. Long, 21 Mont.. 2 Minn. Const. Art. VIII, § 1. 3 Ward v. Flood, 48 Cal. 36. The privilege of attending the public schools of a city is not one appertaining to citizenship, nor can any person demand admission on the mere status of citizenship; the right is to be found as established by constitutional provision in many states, namely, that they shall be nonsectarian, and further, that no discrimination shall be made on account of race, color, nationality or social position. The Minnesota Constitution provides ↑ that no public moneys or public property shall be appropriated or used for the support of schools wherein the distinctive doctrines, creeds or tenets of any particular christian or any religious sect are promulgated or taught. While the duty to provide public is such as arises under and is limited by the state laws establishing and regulating public schools. People v. McAdams, 82 Ill. 356; 'Com. v. Inhabitants of Dedham, 16 Mass. 141. It is not competent for a town to establish a normal school for the benefit of one part of the town to the exclusion of the other. Learock v. Putman, 111 Mass. 499. The right to attend a private school is not a private one held by the individual separately from the community at large, but a political right held in common. In re Malone's Estate, 21 S. C. 435. An orphan house open only to orphan children is not a free public school of the state. Young v. Trustees of Fountain Inn Graded School, 64 S. C. 131, 41 S. E. 824; Town School Dist. of Brattleboro v. School Dist. No. 2, 72 Vt. 451, 48 Atl. 697; State v. Joint School Dist. No. 1, 65 Wis. 631. The constitutional provision that district schools shall be free to all does not authorize children to insist on being admitted to a school in another district than that in which they live. But see State v. School Dist. No. 14, 10 Ohio St. 448. See, also, Halls Free School v. Horne, 80 Va. 470. 4 In re Kindergarten Schools, 18 Colo. 234, 32 Pac. 422, 19 L. R. A. 469; Richter v. Cordes, 100 Mich. 278, 58 N. W. 1110; People v. Board of Education of Brooklyn, 13 Barb. (N. Y.) 400; Sargent v. Board of Education of Rochester, 35 Misc. 321, 71 N. Y. Supp. 54; Synod of Dakota v. State, 2 S. D. 366, 50 N. W. 632, 14 L. R. A. 418. 5 Clark v. Board of Directors, 24 Iowa, 266; Board of Education of Somerset Public Schools v. Trustees of Colored Dist. No. 1, 18 Ky. L. R. 103, 35 S. W. 549; People v. Board of Education of Detroit, 18 Mich. 400; State v. Thompson, 64 Mo. 26; State v. City of Cincinnati, 19 Ohio, 178. Act Feb. 10, 1849 (47 Ohio Laws, p. 17), authorizing the support of schools for the educa tion of colored children held constitutional. But see Board of Education v. Cumming, 103 Ga. 641, 29 S. E. 488; State v. Grubb, 85 Ind. 213; State v. Gray, 93 Ind. 303. Separate schools for colored children authorized. Harrodsburg Educational Dist. No. 28 v. Trustees of Colored School Dist. No. 1, 105 Ky. 675, 49 S. W. 538; Hickman College v. Colored Common School Dist. "A," 23 Ky. L. R. 1271, 65 S. W. 20; Roberts v. City of Boston, 59 Mass. (5 Cush.) 198; Chrisman v. City of Brookhaven, 70 Miss. 477, 12 So. 458; Lane v. Baker, 12 Ohio, 237. But see State v. Gray, 93 Ind. 303. • Minn. Const. Art. VIII, § 3. |